Or, what if, hear me out now, what if colleges stopped the campus beautification arms race, and quit spending hundreds of millions of dollars on new buildings, and then passed the cost savings on to students?
No human has ever done enough work to justify $600,000,000.
I think Salk's polio vaccine was easily worth many times this amount. Of course, he refused to patent it, so that it could get out to do the greatest good as quickly as possible.
Microsoft, on the other hand, DO have infinite money, and they continue to demonstrate why rewriting large, business critical software isn't just a bad idea, it's great for shareholders.
In 1995, a kid in my dorm showed me this new OS called Be. Running on a PowerMac 603 with a single cpu and 16mb of ram, he showed me how Be could play 6 video files simultaneously. Mapped to 6 faces of a cube. And you could spin the cube around via the mouse while all 6 videos were playing. Never any input lag, or dropped frames. It was a thing of beauty.
Microsoft have been wantonly abusing their customers with these non-consentual updates to Windows 10. This should not stand. There needs to be strong legal action against this sort of thing. Let's start by calling it what it is: #WindowsUpdateRape.
I didn't consent to the upgrade, I repeatedly said no, Microsoft repeatedly re-pushed the same upgrader and nagware to my machine. The best way to describe this behavior is "update rape".
Long story short, WebKit did things exactly as they were supposed to. They implemented a proposed standard, prefixed it as they were supposed to, and then implemented the standard version later while maintaining support for the prefixed version. Really, the only ones who aren't following best practices are the developers too lazy to update their code to work with the current standards, but if we're going to blame WebKit for being too quick to support proposals, then we may as well blame the other rendering engines for being so slow that the lazy devs couldn't use their prefixed versions. Two sides of the same coin. It's no surprise that one side blames the other.
I think browser developers could all have gone a little bit further and not enabled their proprietary CSS prefixes in production releases by default. Maybe push those into a "developers only" mode, or an extension, but keep it out of production.
The prefixed CSS rules were supposed to be for not-yet finalized pre-standards versions of stuff the W3C hadn't yet finalized, to give web developers a chance to play with them, test them, and provide feedback so that when W3C finalized their recommendation, they were well tested in the real world and good.
By making them available to everyone early, it incentivized web developers who wanted their websites to look "cutting edge" to make use of the unofficial properties before they were ready. Also, the slowness with which W3C has historically acted to finalize their recommendations exacerbates this incentive. If a web developer waits for the W3C to finalize and only uses W3C recommendations, they're left hoplelessly behind the state of the art.
From that point, it was only a matter of time before a dominant browser emerged with its proprietary prefixes became de facto standards adopted by web developers before W3C was ready to finalize their own version of them. What else could they do?
So, blame W3C for not being faster, but mainly blame browser developers for tacitly allowing and encouraging developers to make use of the experimental CSS properties ahead of itme for production sites.
Maybe people who are planning to commit acts of terror are very likely to study engineering, so that they'll have the sort of knowledge that will be useful in destroying things that engineers design and build?
Whether or not the system was secure is but one concern. Whether the system was transparent and accountable to the authority she worked for as Secretary of State on behalf of the American People is at least an equal, if not greater concern.
Randomness has a well known liberal bias. This is just another example of how our liberal higher educational systems have become corrupted, and why higher education is not just unnecessary, but actually harmful to voters..
1) Is the screen small enough to fit in my pocket? 2) Will the battery last long enough for me to use it actively, more or less all day long, for 24-36 hours on a charge? 3) Does it have a physical, qwerty keyboard?
Lesson 1: Make sure your college roommate is Bill Gates. Lesson 2: Drop out. You don't need this stuff, go make money. Lesson 3: Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers. Lesson 4: When a monopoly is handed to you, ride it into the ground. Lesson 5: When no one likes you, it's proper to own the L. A. Clippers.
If you take drugs and get addicted, that's your responsibility. Not anyone else's.
Think so? I can introduce you to some former surgery patients and war veterans among others who were introduced to opiates to control pain by their physicians for very real pain problems and as a result were unable to avoid addiction. I can point you to some suffering from PTSD (not their fault) who are trying to find some way to cope who sometimes turn to chemicals because they don't understand what has happened and it is the only relief they can find before they understand what has happened. Some addictions are not the solely the fault of the person taking the drugs.
It's easy and wrong to paint every drug addict with the same broad brush. Some, like the sort you are thinking of, are simply idiots seeking pleasure or escape. If you are snorting cocaine on your yacht for fun, yeah that's on you and if you die I'm not going to cry a river for you. Others are decent people trying to cope with a real problem not of their own making. You really think that a wounded veteran who gets unintentionally addicted to opiates while trying to control pain is solely responsible for his situation? If so you are a very cold hearted person.
I think you're conflating "responsibility" with "fault". The addict has the responsibility to deal with the addiction and manage their life, regardless of whether they are morally culpable for becoming an addict. Just as they are responsible for their actions if, for example, their addiction drives them to crime in order to support their habit, or they cause harm while under the influence of the substance that they are addicted to.
Slashdot Mirror
Or, what if, hear me out now, what if colleges stopped the campus beautification arms race, and quit spending hundreds of millions of dollars on new buildings, and then passed the cost savings on to students?
No human has ever done enough work to justify $600,000,000.
I think Salk's polio vaccine was easily worth many times this amount. Of course, he refused to patent it, so that it could get out to do the greatest good as quickly as possible.
Microsoft, on the other hand, DO have infinite money, and they continue to demonstrate why rewriting large, business critical software isn't just a bad idea, it's great for shareholders.
In 1995, a kid in my dorm showed me this new OS called Be. Running on a PowerMac 603 with a single cpu and 16mb of ram, he showed me how Be could play 6 video files simultaneously. Mapped to 6 faces of a cube. And you could spin the cube around via the mouse while all 6 videos were playing. Never any input lag, or dropped frames. It was a thing of beauty.
I for one can't wait to ruin Microsoft by settling for a coupon for $10 off Windows 11.
Why don't they build the ENTIRE PLANE out of USB drives?
Microsoft have been wantonly abusing their customers with these non-consentual updates to Windows 10. This should not stand. There needs to be strong legal action against this sort of thing. Let's start by calling it what it is: #WindowsUpdateRape.
I didn't consent to the upgrade, I repeatedly said no, Microsoft repeatedly re-pushed the same upgrader and nagware to my machine. The best way to describe this behavior is "update rape".
Dwarf planets are not planets any more than daddy long-legs spiders are not spiders.
er, Pholcidae are most definitely spiders.
OK but they're not daddies.
Long story short, WebKit did things exactly as they were supposed to. They implemented a proposed standard, prefixed it as they were supposed to, and then implemented the standard version later while maintaining support for the prefixed version. Really, the only ones who aren't following best practices are the developers too lazy to update their code to work with the current standards, but if we're going to blame WebKit for being too quick to support proposals, then we may as well blame the other rendering engines for being so slow that the lazy devs couldn't use their prefixed versions. Two sides of the same coin. It's no surprise that one side blames the other.
I think browser developers could all have gone a little bit further and not enabled their proprietary CSS prefixes in production releases by default. Maybe push those into a "developers only" mode, or an extension, but keep it out of production.
The prefixed CSS rules were supposed to be for not-yet finalized pre-standards versions of stuff the W3C hadn't yet finalized, to give web developers a chance to play with them, test them, and provide feedback so that when W3C finalized their recommendation, they were well tested in the real world and good.
By making them available to everyone early, it incentivized web developers who wanted their websites to look "cutting edge" to make use of the unofficial properties before they were ready. Also, the slowness with which W3C has historically acted to finalize their recommendations exacerbates this incentive. If a web developer waits for the W3C to finalize and only uses W3C recommendations, they're left hoplelessly behind the state of the art.
From that point, it was only a matter of time before a dominant browser emerged with its proprietary prefixes became de facto standards adopted by web developers before W3C was ready to finalize their own version of them. What else could they do?
So, blame W3C for not being faster, but mainly blame browser developers for tacitly allowing and encouraging developers to make use of the experimental CSS properties ahead of itme for production sites.
Maybe people who are planning to commit acts of terror are very likely to study engineering, so that they'll have the sort of knowledge that will be useful in destroying things that engineers design and build?
Still better than a few alternatives I could name, such as:
1) redefine good.
2) redefine good to mean good for google.
Whether or not the system was secure is but one concern. Whether the system was transparent and accountable to the authority she worked for as Secretary of State on behalf of the American People is at least an equal, if not greater concern.
This will result in increased competition. What's the downside exactly?
What I want to know is, what laptop has 3-6 disk slots??? The most I've ever seen in a laptop is 2.
Randomness has a well known liberal bias. This is just another example of how our liberal higher educational systems have become corrupted, and why higher education is not just unnecessary, but actually harmful to voters..
First they came for the livers, but I said nothing, because I had no liver...
I.
LOVE.
THIS.
COUNTRY!
WOOOOOOO!
And I cannot lie.
Technically? I believe the CAN!
Legally? This may be termed an "act of war". Best to be careful here.
Magnets?
Yeah, but how do they fucking work?
1) Is the screen small enough to fit in my pocket?
2) Will the battery last long enough for me to use it actively, more or less all day long, for 24-36 hours on a charge?
3) Does it have a physical, qwerty keyboard?
The answers are:
No.
You mean they were different companies? Huh.
But I'm not concerned with advertising as much as I'm concerned with tracking. How much for a year of tracking-free internet?
Lesson 1: Make sure your college roommate is Bill Gates.
Lesson 2: Drop out. You don't need this stuff, go make money.
Lesson 3: Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers.
Lesson 4: When a monopoly is handed to you, ride it into the ground.
Lesson 5: When no one likes you, it's proper to own the L. A. Clippers.
If you take drugs and get addicted, that's your responsibility. Not anyone else's.
Think so? I can introduce you to some former surgery patients and war veterans among others who were introduced to opiates to control pain by their physicians for very real pain problems and as a result were unable to avoid addiction. I can point you to some suffering from PTSD (not their fault) who are trying to find some way to cope who sometimes turn to chemicals because they don't understand what has happened and it is the only relief they can find before they understand what has happened. Some addictions are not the solely the fault of the person taking the drugs.
It's easy and wrong to paint every drug addict with the same broad brush. Some, like the sort you are thinking of, are simply idiots seeking pleasure or escape. If you are snorting cocaine on your yacht for fun, yeah that's on you and if you die I'm not going to cry a river for you. Others are decent people trying to cope with a real problem not of their own making. You really think that a wounded veteran who gets unintentionally addicted to opiates while trying to control pain is solely responsible for his situation? If so you are a very cold hearted person.
I think you're conflating "responsibility" with "fault". The addict has the responsibility to deal with the addiction and manage their life, regardless of whether they are morally culpable for becoming an addict. Just as they are responsible for their actions if, for example, their addiction drives them to crime in order to support their habit, or they cause harm while under the influence of the substance that they are addicted to.